That is outrageous! Does this vary from state to state? (I guess not since it was a SCOTUS decision.)
Why haven’t I known this? Maybe because the MSM hasn’t been doing their job?
Never heard of such a thing, really. And I’ve been paying attention!
> That is outrageous! <
It sure is. The 6th Amendment to the US Constitution:
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed...”
No! said the US Supreme Court in 1970 (Baldwin v. New York, 399 U.S. 66). “All” doesn’t really mean “all”. It only means for those cases where the penalty is more than six months imprisonment. So if you are charged with a crime carrying a penalty of six months or less, the jury option is not available.
This is disgusting! But no one seems to care.
By the way, that’s how the Fed’s convicted Sheriff Joe Arpaio. He was very popular. So the Fed’s charged him with a crime that carried a penalty of six months. No jury. The federal judge convicted him.